http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2004/columns/story?columnist=aldridge_david&id=1808516

what a fucking sissy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2004/news/story?id=1808504

"I'm an elephant, I don't forget."

ok, did this shot actually hit him above the shoulders? i only saw the few replays during the game, haven't watched sportscenter or anything...and from those first few replays, i didn't see anything above the shoulders. flagrant, yes. stupid, yes. i didn't see this head shot, though. I saw D.Martin (who I'm actually a big fan of, go Bruins!) throw his head back, but not the shot that would have caused it. i didn't see a suspension worthy play, or an intent to injure.

i hardly think he was trying to get around the pick, or whatever it is that he said he was doing. He meant to hit him hard, and to send a message, i would guess.

Originally posted by Orenthal James
i hardly think he was trying to get around the pick, or whatever it is that he said he was doing. He meant to hit him hard, and to send a message, i would guess. yes, i said it was a flagrant play..it was obviously intentional. but a flagrant foul is not cause alone for a suspension. what i'm asking, is if you think he actually hit him above the shoulders. i didn't think he did, but now hearing a few of these stories...i'm wondering if i totally missed it, or if people are jumping at it because of the Peeler/Garnett issue, it involving Malone, and the hype surrounding the Lakers.

Originally posted by guz
yes, i said it was a flagrant play..it was obviously intentional. but a flagrant foul is not cause alone for a suspension. what i'm asking, is if you think he actually hit him above the shoulders. i didn't think he did, but now hearing a few of these stories...i'm wondering if i totally missed it, or if people are jumping at it because of the Peeler/Garnett issue, it involving Malone, and the hype surrounding the Lakers.

i couldnt tell if the shot hit him about the shoulders or not. I dont think it did, otherwise i hardly think martin could have gotten up.

So if it didn't, you think he should've been suspended anyhow?

Originally posted by guz
So if it didn't, you think he should've been suspended anyhow?

no.

i think he sould have elbowed madsen, or miller, or johnson, someone comparable to him. Dont hit a guy seven inches shorter than you because you are pissed. And if he wanted to get back at Wally, he should have nailed him.

you can read all about karl malone's long and sordid violent history here: http://www.makingpages.org/hoops/Malone.danger.html

It's typical NBA. Stars get fined, role players get suspended.

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
It's typical NBA. Stars get fined, role players get suspended. so you think he hit him above the shoulders?

Originally posted by Sean Casey
Nobody gives a shit about Derrick Martin, but they want to see the Mailman out there throwin bows do you think the play was worthy of a suspension? star player or not?

i didn't see it so i don't know, but if you read that link i posted, you'll see "the mailman" has no problem whatsoever with nearly killing an opponent. he should actually be in jail and not in the NBA at all.

Originally posted by guz
do you think the play was worthy of a suspension? star player or not? Here's my point. Was it worthy of a suspension? Absolutely, and here's why:

Let's say the week after Terell Owens was fined for the Sharpee incident that Randy Moss did the same thing, and his fine was $100. Did he deserve more? Yes, based on precedent.

After Kyle Turley threw his helmet, should the next helmet thrower get off lighter? No.

When Roberto Alomar spit in the ump's face, if the following week say, Claudell Washington did it to another ump and he get a year suspension, is that fair? No.

So,the point is I don't think what Malone did was suspension worthy. However, the NBA, judging my precedent, does. What I don't like is selective enforcement.

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
Here's my point. Was it worthy of a suspension? Absolutely, and here's why:
[snip]
So,the point is I don't think what Malone did was suspension worthy. However, the NBA, judging my precedent, does. What I don't like is selective enforcement. what precedant. it's being compared to the Peeler/Garnett incident, but i really don't think they're the same. Garnett has what, 6" on Peeler...that was straight to the top. Malone made no swing or direct motion to the head...and from what I've seen, he didn't even hit him above the shoulders. it was more him plowing through to get a foul but make a statement, rather than an intent to injure.

$ 7500=chumpchange

Originally posted by if you are
you can read all about karl malone's long and sordid violent history here: http://www.makingpages.org/hoops/Malone.danger.html

i'm not debating malone's dirty play, that's pretty well established. but its sources like those that undermine the credibility of their own accusations. the guy clearly has an agenda and does a shitty job of not sounding like an idiot too.

"Eddie Sefko of the Houston Chronicle charitably called it a "wild elbow." Avery Johnson said, "He should be suspended. You saw the replay. Two plus two equals four." Of course, only some people saw the replay. Jazz officials refused to allow the replay to be shown in the stadium on the big screens. Obviously, they were afraid that even Jazz fans would turn against Malone. In an ESPN poll, only 29.8% of respondents though it was an accident. Robinson himself forgave Malone, which was very Christian of him, since he seemed to believe the blow was intentional."

first of all, its not OBVIOUS that the officials were afraid jazz fans would turn against malone, that's stupid. refs are likely wanting not to expose their own asses to criticism, moreso than 'protecting' malone's reputation. wtf.

secondly, since when do christians have a monopoly on forgiveness? even if robinson is christian, so what. seriously, this guy is lame.

that said, malone plays like a drrrty rat!

/grumpy. i really need to eat something.